CompuServe Messages

Martin, And because it's not uniform now…does that mean it can never be uniform? That's all I'm asking for…uniformity. I believe that's best obtained by having shell expansion because that's the way it's done in the majority of shells that I'm familiar with (including the UNIX shells) and thus it's less of a problem porting code from one environment to another. I also see it as simplyfing code…it's much easier to handle the argument count and loop based on that than it is to check to see if any of the input arguments contains a wildcard and then expand it and also have to handle looping based on the final number of arugments. If I see I've got 20 arguments to a command, I can easily handle that whether the arguments were typed by the user, or the result of shell expansion. Without shell expansion, I've got to first check each argument, see if there's a wildcard, expand that particular argument into it's matches and then go into the program logic based on the now possibly new count of arguments. Don